| From: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net>, Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz>, David Garamond <lists(at)zara(dot)6(dot)isreserved(dot)com>, Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, Gaetano Mendola <mendola(at)bigfoot(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: |
| Date: | 2004-05-24 00:42:56 |
| Message-ID: | 20040523214201.U81608@ganymede.hub.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, 23 May 2004, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Matthew T. O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net> writes:
> > There will always be people who won't read the notes, or ignore the
> > notes,
>
> Does anyone want to contemplate hacking things so that the Windows port
> reports a different version number? "0.1" might give people the right
> sort of impression about what we think of that port's stability ...
How about a pop-up when starting up that repeatedly reinforces that this
is considered a early port, and should be treated as such in a production
environment. When we have it to the point we consider stable, we remove
teh popup?
----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2004-05-24 01:40:42 | Re: New horology failure |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-05-24 00:08:38 | Re: Timezone fun (bugs and a request) |